The proponents of year-round daylight saving time for Colorado apparently haven’t considered all the ramifications. “Oh good,” they say, “an extra hour of sunlight!” Obviously, this is not the case. Instead, kids will go to school in the dark for most of the winter (as will most workers), since it won’t get light until well after 8 a.m. Depressing, and potentially a safety issue. Energy savings? The lights will just stay on longer in the morning.

And how about unintended (or unanticipated) consequences? For skiers, lifts won’t open until 9:30 or 10, and the snow won’t soften up for an hour after that. Most Broncos home games, after the rest of the country switches to standard time, won’t start until 3:25.

Folks, it’s not that tough to move the clocks twice a year. Year-round daylight saving time is just a bad idea.

John Goldstein,Denver

This letter was published in the Feb. 25 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

One critic of a felony DUI bill in Colorado says, “It’s not a magic bullet. It does not have a deterrent effect that a lot of people think.” Another says making it a felony will not prevent drinking and driving.

But the years spent in jail by someone with repeat DUIs means that at least during those years, unknown numbers of loved people will not be slaughtered.

Years ago my dear father was killed by a repeat offender, and my mother and I seriously injured. Would that that man had been in jail for his previous DUIs.

Carol Waite Connor,Littleton

This letter was published in the Feb. 24 edition.

If the state of Colorado wants to prevent drunken driving, lawmakers must acknowledge that alcohol is a legal, mind-altering, addictive drug with no long-term medical treatment for alcohol addiction. Alcohol education is helpful, but after ingesting alcohol, a person’s ability to adequately determine his or her ability to drive deteriorates. A first-time offender can cause a fatal crash. Certainly most multiple DUI offenders are addicted to alcohol.

What passes for alcohol treatment in the 21st century is abysmal. Until there is a political will to invest in medical treatment for alcohol addiction, many will be unable to stop drinking, and worse, they may drive drunk.

There is a device that can be installed in vehicles that requires only a touch of a finger to determine if alcohol is present and the vehicle will not start. If politicians and the public truly want to end drunken driving, such a device is a simple fix.

Phyllis Mains,Cortez

This letter was published in the Feb. 24 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

Since my husband and I are both Anthem customers, we’re following this unfortunate handling of our personal information by Anthem, a company I’m sure many people “trust.” Not encrypting this information was asking for trouble.
My concern is this: Our Social Security numbers are us, our identity, for the rest of our lives. These stolen lists of information will filter down for years to willing buyers. It may be five years before someone buys the list with my name on it.

Meanwhile, the AllClearID protection that Anthem is offering us for free for 24 months will cost my husband and me $14.95 a month each thereafter. If we hope to live many more years, I don’t have to spell out the math. Another $30 a month for us for the rest of our lives because Anthem screwed up? Anthem should offer this protection to us for life.

Carol Murphy,Aurora

This letter was published in the Feb. 24 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

The pursuit of this federal case began with the United States Equal Opportunity Commission ruling finding probable cause that Valerie Arnold [who was fired by former Independent Monitor Richard Rosenthal] had been retaliated against. For those of us who have been following this case over the last four years, it is a story of the city using all of its resources to personally attack an individual who was legally pursuing her experience of injustice.

The jury did the best job they could with the limited information that was allowed into this court case. Someday, this experience will make a great book.

Karla Ferguson,Denver

This letter was published in the Feb. 24 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

Now that Denver’s mayor and police chief have instructed their patrolmen to stand back while a mob may desecrate a memorial or wreck something symbolic or revered and make arrests afterward, should we not ask if anything would be exempt from vandalism?

Should a patrolman have to wait until so-called graffiti artists are finished defacing churches and synagogues with hateful symbols before making arrests?

Should streets now remain blocked during fires, medical emergencies, or rush hours until the perpetrators tire of their frolic?

May legitimate peaceful protests be subject to disruption until their participants are driven from the public square?

Must shopkeepers have to fear that their properties will be unprotected until the last embers thereof cool?

How would a re-enactment of Kristallnacht be treated in Brave New Denver?

Should Denverites re-elect such cowards?

Russell W. Haas,Golden

This letter was published in the Feb. 23 edition.

I support Denver Police Chief Robert White in his decision to not immediately arrest vandals who desecrated the fallen officers memorial. It is not as though the vandals have gotten away with the crime. The chief’s decision to maintain peace and arrest later prevented a physical confrontation and permitted the unpopular protesters to make their unpopular point.

Laurie L. Cole,Aurora

This letter was published in the Feb. 23 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

The Federal Aviation Administration has moved with careful consideration for public safety in adopting rules for drones. Still, a lot more needs to be done. Existing rules, scant and insufficient, will not protect the public from the inevitable mayhem that surely will come with unbridled and uncontrolled growth of this new industry.

A 55-pound piece of machinery with spinning rotors falling from the sky can cause serious injury and damage. That’s why the FAA and lawmakers need to move quickly to implement strict rules of operation, field testing for drone pilot licensure, vehicle safety inspection, insurance requirements that start in the millions of dollars for victim compensation, and serious consequences for scofflaws.

While I cannot speak for the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, the largest organization of drone enthusiasts, I believe that the majority of members would prefer safe, careful implementation of this new technology.

Walt Heidenfelder,Denver

This letter was published in the Feb. 23 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

Denver Mayor Michael B. Hancock’s guest commentary about breaking promises to illegal immigrants is an example of what is wrong with this country.

The real promise broken is the one to the American people taken by President Obama to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Twenty-six states are fighting the president’s executive order on immigration as being unconstitutional. Rather than negotiating with Congress, Obama decided the result is more important than the means.

If we do not abide by the Constitution and separation of powers, then we no longer have a country. By allowing this action to stand, we would be destroying the very core of what has made this country one that people want to come to.

Steve Gehrke,Aurora

This letter was published in the Feb. 23 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

An oil rig towers over homes in Erie on Jan. 15. The Denver Post’s “Managing the Boom” series looked at the relationship between Colorado’s booming oil and gas industry and affected communities and agricultural areas. (RJ Sangosti, The Denver Post)

Almost 40 years ago, my family decided to allow Amoco Production Company to drill underneath our farms in exchange for royalty payments. I thought this was a prudent financial choice, but have discovered after recent well drilling that it had been an error in judgment.

My family and I started to notice strange smells coming from the tank battery owned by Encana, the operating company for the new wells. I inquired to the state and a representative came out to the area and confirmed that the battery was not built correctly.

Why was this not built correctly in the first place? If an industrial operation is constructed very close to families’ homes, shouldn’t the energy companies take careful precautions to ensure that all the equipment is properly constructed? I am not opposed to oil and gas drilling; but families should not have to be negatively affected in order to get protections from drilling in their area.

I urge the governor’s oil and gas task force to recommend strong community protections.

Jim Hergenreder,Longmont

This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.

It would seem that so many people move to rural Colorado and expect to have an idyllic situation. Once they move, these people are often surprised to find oil and gas workers drilling, miners mining, hunters hunting, cows mooing, and elk stomping their grass and flowers. On top of that, we have thousands living in areas that are at high risk of forest fires and are shocked that the rest of the citizens of the state don’t want to pay exorbitant taxes so they can have their view.

Look, people, life is filled with tradeoffs and it was your choice to live where you do — just like those of us who live in urban areas deal with traffic, crime, crowding and noise. I am for people making their own choices in this life; just don’t make the rest of us have to pay so you can strictly control the environment in which you live.

Joseph Galmish,Wheat Ridge

This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.

As with the construction of airports well “out of town” and then followed by construction of residential developments closer and closer, resulting in those new residents complaining about the noise, now we see the same thing happening with the construction of drilling sites. If the development was already established, residents might have a case, but if they purchased a home near the existing site, my feeling is: If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Barbara Vetter,Broomfield

This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.

In order for the public to make informed decisions about fracking, the pros and cons must be objectively presented. Your series neglected to mention several research-based consequences that people need to understand in order to protect themselves and their loved ones.

Your articles did not mention evidence of health hazards associated with fracking, particularly for the very young, as well as the health effects of the myriad chemicals used. There was no mention of earthquakes that are linked to wastewater injection. Drinking water and aquifers are put at risk by fracking. Methane leaks are significantly higher than frackers have previously stated. Methane is associated with global weather chaos and is 20-plus times more potent than CO2.

Your articles mentioned consequences that can be tolerated considering the economic benefits, but neglected to inform the public of consequences to life and limb.

Richard Bluhm,Westminster

This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

Vincent Carroll writes of the folly of divesting from fossil fuels. Where’s the greater folly? Is it not in our failing to divest from fossil fuels while investing in cleaner, sustainable energy sources, and soon enough preserving life as we know it?

Carroll asked (then answered) the rhetorical question: “Is it a bad thing that 1.6 billion people were introduced to electricity in the 1990s alone, or a good thing that 1 billion people still lack it today? Of course not.”

As a divestment advocate, I certainly agree that electricity is a valued good. Yet, I vigorously oppose expanding fossil-fuel investments in dirty coal to produce that electricity, especially when solar and wind power are now up to the job. That’s why I joined the recent Greenpeace and 350.org rally for coal divestment in downtown Denver.

Ken Connell,Thornton

This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

If the Colorado State Public Defender’s office keeps its spending records correctly, then it has no reason to hide. The office is funded by government funds, which is taxpayer money, and should be under the same scrutiny as the state prosecutor’s office, which was just audited. If this is allowed to continue, which government office will be next to claim the same rules as the public defender’s office?

William Straight, Denver

This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.

To reach the Denver Post editorial page by phone: 303-954-1331

Recent Comments

peterpi: I think I have this correct: Voters in Jefferson County elected school board members that the superintendent...

peterpi: Sounds good to me. For future employees. I believe police and fire dept. brass have also been known to get...